Which critera for ranking players is accurate?

[kennethgriffin]

The jordan/bran/duncan fan criteria

Espn Mvps +fmvps

( rings dont count, all nba teams dont count, skills dont count/ scoring achivements dont count, eye test doesnt count, democracy doesnt count )

#1 jordan (11)
#2 kareem (8)
#3 lebron (6)
#4 magic (6)
#5 wilt (6)
#6 duncan (5)
#7 bird (5)
#8 russell (5)
#9 moses (4)
#10 shaq (4)
#11 kobe (3)
#12 hakeem (3)
#13 steve nash (2)
#14 karl malone (2)
#15 bob pettit (2)
#16 willis reed (2)
#17dirk nowitzki (2)
#18 dennis johnson (1)
#19 derrick rose (1)
#20 cedric maxwell (1)
#21 joe dumars (1)
#22 jo jo white (1)
#23 wade (1)
#24 parker (1)
#25 billups (1)





Or how about a real list where everything an athlete does in basketball counts?


#1 Russell
#2 jordan
#3 kareem
#4 wilt
#5 kobe
#6 magic
#7 bird
#8 shaq
#9 duncan
#10 hakeem
#11 lebron
#12 oscar
#13 west
#14 baylor
#15 moses
#16 dr j
#17 pettit
#18 havlicek
#19 barkley
#20 robinson
#21 k.malone
#22 stockton
#23 cousy
#24 mikan
#25 dirk


See with your eyes. Not with your agenda

Which list is better?

[livinglegend]

the first one is better
any list with the rapist at 5 sucks
/ thread

[NumberSix]

Rings + MVPs + FMVPs.


Jordan = 17

[navy]

That first list isnt half bad.

[kennethgriffin]

Rings + MVPs + FMVPs.


Jordan = 17


Theres more to the game

Not all rings are created equal. Not all fmvps are accurate. Not all season mvps are voted by players.

[kennethgriffin]

yes ESPN voted for bill russells MVPs :roll: :roll:, and he would be higher because the werent FMVP when he won championships


Thats my point tho.. The 2nd list is mine


Ofcourse russells mvps count. I respect the player vote

[fpliii]

Why not just go off the eye test? Not trolling here, just completely throw all accolades (aside from championships) out the window. Analyze how good players are, if winning as many championships as possible with them as your main piece is the goal. Take into account quality of teammates, role, etc.

:confusedshrug:

[TheMarkMadsen]

That first list isnt half bad.


yeah i've always considered Jo Jo white, Chauncey Billups, Joe Dumars, Dennis Johnson, Cedric Maxwell & derrick Rose to be top 25 GOATS

Steve Nash top 15 player all time

[SamuraiSWISH]

Jordan's GOAT

5x MVPs (should've been 9x)
6x Finals MVPs
6x Rings
DPOY

Most entertaining, sexiest game (inside, and perimeter), played in a physical era with no touch calls padding numbers. Won with the tools he was given in terms of franchise. Most competitive, most alpha.

Oh yea, gave up 2x years of his prime to play baseball. Absurd longevity, production, success, and dominance.

Hell, even the cover band version of Jordan (Kobe) is a top ten player of all-time. That's telling you something.

Everything after MJ is up for argument.

[navy]

yeah i've always considered Jo Jo white, Chauncey Billups, Joe Dumars, Dennis Johnson, Cedric Maxwell & derrick Rose to be top 25 GOATS

Steve Nash top 15 player all time

Glad we are in agreement. :pimp:

[Milbuck]

As long as MJ is #1, I couldn't really give a shit.

[kennethgriffin]

Why not just go off the eye test? Not trolling here, just completely throw all accolades (aside from championships) out the window. Analyze how good players are, if winning as many championships as possible with them as your main piece is the goal. Take into account quality of teammates, role, etc.

:confusedshrug:


Its mainly about titles. But some guys like stockton are obviously ahead of some good players that managed to win a few titles ..

It really is strictly judgemental and personal preference


The only real way to rank players is to have everyone in the nba make a list. Then average it out.

Have all the coaches/players/hof'ers vote. I would accept that list even if i disagreed with it

[fpliii]

Its mainly about titles. But some guys like stockton are obviously ahead of some good players that managed to win a few titles ..

It really is strictly judgemental and personal preference


The only real way to rank players is to have everyone in the nba make a list. Then average it out.

Have all the coaches/players/hof'ers vote. I would accept that list even if i disagreed with it
Nah, they aren't necessarily the best judges of ability. The main problem would be politics though, they'd all vote for their contemporaries and teammates.

[iamgine]

The jordan/bran/duncan fan criteria

Espn Mvps +fmvps

( rings dont count, all nba teams dont count, skills dont count/ scoring achivements dont count, eye test doesnt count, democracy doesnt count )

#1 jordan (11)
#2 kareem (8)
#3 lebron (6)
#4 magic (6)
#5 wilt (6)
#6 duncan (5)
#7 bird (5)
#8 russell (5)
#9 moses (4)
#10 shaq (4)
#11 kobe (3)
#12 hakeem (3)
#13 steve nash (2)
#14 karl malone (2)
#15 bob pettit (2)
#16 willis reed (2)
#17dirk nowitzki (2)
#18 dennis johnson (1)
#19 derrick rose (1)
#20 cedric maxwell (1)
#21 joe dumars (1)
#22 jo jo white (1)
#23 wade (1)
#24 parker (1)
#25 billups (1)





Or how about a real list where everything an athlete does in basketball counts?


#1 Russell
#2 jordan
#3 kareem
#4 wilt
#5 kobe
#6 magic
#7 bird
#8 shaq
#9 duncan
#10 hakeem
#11 lebron
#12 oscar
#13 west
#14 baylor
#15 moses
#16 dr j
#17 pettit
#18 havlicek
#19 barkley
#20 robinson
#21 k.malone
#22 stockton
#23 cousy
#24 mikan
#25 dirk


See with your eyes. Not with your agenda

Which list is better?
Would be better if you take the top 10 from 1st list and bottom 10 from 2nd list.

[kennethgriffin]

Nah, they aren't necessarily the best judges of ability. The main problem would be politics though, they'd all vote for their contemporaries and teammates.


It would average out. Each era would be represented. All equally biased. And not every great player has the same cliq

[kennethgriffin]

Would be better if you take the top 10 from 1st list and bottom 10 from 2nd list.


Sorry.. The whole point of the bottom 15 is to debunk the idiotic criteria of jordan/lebron/duncan fans


It works quite well dont ya think?

[fpliii]

It would average out. Each era would be represented. All equally biased. And not every great player has the same cliq
Meh.

I think we'd get a decent list if we held a poll on here. Just won't be able to rank Jordan, Kobe, LeBron because all three have rabid fanbases on ISH.

[kennethgriffin]

Why are duncan and lebron fans so quiet?

I thought it was allllllllll about mvps/mvps??????????????











F*ckin idiots lol

[iamgine]

Sorry.. The whole point of the bottom 15 is to debunk the idiotic criteria of jordan/lebron/duncan fans


It works quite well dont ya think?
1st list top 10 looks good but bottom doesn't.

2nd list top 10 looks bad but bottom looks better.

[jlip]

None of Russell's, Wilt's, or Kareem's MVPs are "ESPN MVPs" given that they all were voted by the players, not the media.

[Solefade]

no consistent criteria for top 10 all time will work just like MVP "criteria", does the best player on the best team earn the MVP or the player that turns a bottom feeder into a contender (i.e. steve nash)? need context

[aj1987]

Second list is just plain retarded. Stockton at 22 and no Wade in the top 25?

[Warfan]

Why are duncan and lebron fans so quiet?

I thought it was allllllllll about mvps/mvps??????????????











F*ckin idiots lol

Why you giving Duncan shit tho
4 rings 3FMVPs 2 MVPs

[kennethgriffin]

Second list is just plain retarded. Stockton at 22 and no Wade in the top 25?


You cant seriously think wade is better than every single player in nba history that doesnt have a title? Do u?

Cause thats exactly what you're emplying by saying hes better than stockton.. Since your only argument would be rings

News flash. Wade was gifted that 06 title. And just making the finals in the 90s is 10 times more valuable than any miami team up ring chasing asterisk crap where wade is a willing kickstand to a lockout title or ray allen joke

Stockton is the all time leader in assists and steals. Hes arguably the greatest pure pg all time.

Wade looks forward to 3rd team all nba's in a week sg era. Meh

[kennethgriffin]

Why you giving Duncan shit tho
4 rings 3FMVPs 2 MVPs


Cause his fans or haters trying to discredit kobe try throwing out rings and every aspect of basketball asside from the fact of 1 more fmvp/1 more season mvp to somehow win an argument

[Illuminati]

The first list actually looks legit. Can't argue with that.

[aj1987]

You cant seriously think wade is better than every single player in nba history that doesnt have a title? Do u?

Cause thats exactly what you're emplying by saying hes better than stockton.. Since your only argument would be rings

News flash. Wade was gifted that 06 title. And just making the finals in the 90s is 10 times more valuable than any miami team up ring chasing asterisk crap where wade is a willing kickstand to a lockout title or ray allen joke

Stockton is the all time leader in assists and steals. Hes arguably the greatest pure pg all time.

Wade looks forward to 3rd team all nba's in a week sg era. Meh
If I did think Wade was better than everyone without a ring, I would rank him over Barkley and Malone as well. My argument would be 3 rings, 1 FMVP, a career average of 25/5/5/2/1 on 50%.

Well, you do have Kobe at #5 with 5 carried rings (3 by Shaq and refs, '09 Gasol, and '10 Gasol + refs). Kobe has 5* rings. Take him out of the top 25 as well.

Also, you're talking about the stacked Heat teams and yet you have Cousy, Hondo, etc. in there. :facepalm

[Warfan]

Cause his fans or haters trying to discredit kobe try throwing out rings and every aspect of basketball asside from the fact of 1 more fmvp/1 more season mvp to somehow win an argument

Yeah he deserves more credit for those first 3 rings than people give him, although I don't feel that his first title was that impressive tbh. Do u atleast feel that duncan has a case over kobe?

[kennethgriffin]

If I did think Wade was better than everyone without a ring, I would rank him over Barkley and Malone as well. My argument would be 3 rings, 1 FMVP, a career average of 25/5/5/2/1 on 50%.

Well, you do have Kobe at #5 with 5 carried rings (3 by Shaq and refs, '09 Gasol, and '10 Gasol + refs). Kobe has 5* rings. Take him out of the top 25 as well.

Also, you're talking about the stacked Heat teams and yet you have Cousy, Hondo, etc. in there. :facepalm



Did you just say all 5 of kobes rings dont count due to playing with shaq/ unfair reffing/ and playing with gasol in defense of ......... Dwyane........ Wade?

Ok













....

[aj1987]

Did you just say all 5 of kobes rings dont count due to playing with shaq/ unfair reffing/ and playing with gasol in defense of ......... Dwyane........ Wade?

Ok


....
Yep. Just as you said that Wade's rings don't count in defense of Stockton.

[kennethgriffin]

Yep. Just as you said that Wade's rings don't count in defense of Stockton.


my opinion is based on reality

you're opinion is based on spite of my opinion


A) wades 06 title was tainted by 20ft's per game

B) wades 12 title was tainted by colluding/lockouts

C) wades 13 title was tainted by colluding/ray allen


at most i credit wade with 1.5 rings

but even then. wades prime lasted 2 years.

stockton is so much better its not even funny..

19,711 points vs 17,127 points

and stockton never even tried to score

thats specifically what wade does best.

which is pretty sad... considering wade is 32 years old

a 32 year old prolific scorer in the nba should have more career points than john stockton for god sake



wade:

2004-05 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2004-05 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2005-06 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2006-07 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2008-09 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2008-09 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2009-10 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2009-10 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2010-11 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2011-12 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2012-13 NBA All-NBA (3rd)



stockton:

1987-88 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1989-90 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1991-92 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1991-92 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1992-93 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1993-94 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1994-95 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1994-95 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1995-96 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1998-99 NBA All-NBA (3rd)



all time leader in assists and steals... best pure PG ever...

single handedly made karl malones career.. spoon feeding him gimmys from HIS pick and role dissection


add up atleast half of what malone did.. put it on stocktons resume... call it a career

/your life

[Deuce Bigalow]

I like my ranking minus Cousy

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9356655&postcount=56

[JohnFreeman]

my opinion is based on reality

you're opinion is based on spite of my opinion


A) wades 06 title was tainted by 20ft's per game

B) wades 12 title was tainted by colluding/lockouts

C) wades 13 title was tainted by colluding/ray allen


at most i credit wade with 1.5 rings

but even then. wades prime lasted 2 years.

stockton is so much better its not even funny..

19,711 points vs 17,127 points

and stockton never even tried to score

thats specifically what wade does best.

which is pretty sad... considering wade is 32 years old

a 32 year old prolific scorer in the nba should have more career points than john stockton for god sake



wade:

2004-05 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2004-05 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2005-06 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2006-07 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2008-09 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2008-09 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2009-10 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2009-10 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2010-11 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2011-12 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2012-13 NBA All-NBA (3rd)



stockton:

1987-88 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1989-90 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1991-92 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1991-92 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1992-93 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1993-94 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1994-95 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1994-95 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1995-96 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1998-99 NBA All-NBA (3rd)



all time leader in assists and steals... best pure PG ever...

single handedly made karl malones career.. spoon feeding him gimmys from HIS pick and role dissection


add up atleast half of what malone did.. put it on stocktons resume... call it a career

/your life
http://images.wikia.com/the-gt-forums/images/7/76/Boo.gif

[Nevaeh]

Yeah he deserves more credit for those first 3 rings than people give him, although I don't feel that his first title was that impressive tbh. Do u atleast feel that duncan has a case over kobe?

The one big case that you can give to Duncan, aside from what's been listed already, is that he's been the Main Cog on the Spurs since he first began his career. He's also responsible for putting the Spurs on the Championship "map" so to speak, and not winning it all on an already established championship winning team.

The "longevity" thing is pretty much a wash, considering what Duncan did for the Spurs in getting them to the Finals last year at age 37, when few could have predicted it after the 12-13 season. He's also proven that he could win comfortably with people from all walks of life, from euros, to suburban kids, hood cats and everything in between, all while making them all feel welcome when they join the team.

[DatAsh]

Rings are meaningless as a measuring sticks in and of themselves. What they are are evidence.

Rings don't make a player great, but great players often win many rings.

[Marchesk]

Any all-time list that doesn't have Oscar and West in the top 15 is pure bullshit.

For cthulu's sake, Oscar was a GOAT candidate before the Magic/Bird/Jordan hype machines made people forget about the past. No wonder he got all salty in his old age.

[aj1987]

A) wades 06 title was tainted by 20ft's per game
It was actually 16, but so what? Kobe got 15 FT's a game against the Kings in '01. Also, lets not forget the '02 screwjob. Now, Kobe has 3 rings.


B) wades 12 title was tainted by colluding/lockouts
'00 title was tainted by the amount of carrying that Shaq did.


C) wades 13 title was tainted by colluding/ray allen
'09 and '10 are tainted by being carried by the best frontline in the NBA. 6/24 in a game 7 and gets carried by his team to another ring.



at most i credit wade with 1.5 rings
Good for you.


but even then. wades prime lasted 2 years.
Aren't you a 30 year old alcoholic loser from Canada? You must definitely have had time to see Wade between '05 and '11. You know...the 7 seasons during which he put up 27/5/7/2/1 on 49%.


stockton is so much better its not even funny..

19,711 points vs 17,127 points

and stockton never even tried to score

thats specifically what wade does best.

which is pretty sad... considering wade is 32 years old
Wade played about half as many games as Stockton. To put this in perspective, at 700 games played, Kobe had 16900 points. For one of the "greatest scorers" in the history of the game, he should have more points than stockton and Wade.


a 32 year old prolific scorer in the nba should have more career points than john stockton for god sake
Read above.




wade:

2004-05 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2004-05 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2005-06 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2006-07 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2008-09 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2008-09 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2009-10 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
2009-10 NBA All-NBA (1st)
2010-11 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
2011-12 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
2012-13 NBA All-NBA (3rd)



stockton:

1987-88 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1988-89 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1989-90 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1990-91 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1991-92 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1991-92 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1992-93 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1993-94 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1994-95 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1994-95 NBA All-NBA (1st)
1995-96 NBA All-NBA (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)
1996-97 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
1998-99 NBA All-NBA (3rd)
You do realize that Kobe was Wade's competition, right? A top 10 (you have in the top 5!!) GOAT...


all time leader in assists and steals... best pure PG ever...

single handedly made karl malones career.. spoon feeding him gimmys from HIS pick and role dissection


add up atleast half of what malone did.. put it on stocktons resume... call it a career

/my life
So, what you're saying is that Stockton would be a scrub if he wasn't playing with one of the GOAT PF's? You DID rank Malone above Stockton. Stockton and Malone two top 25 players couldn't win a title with almost two decades of playing together? Damn! GOAT losers!

FYI, Shaq was averaging 36/15 with Kobe in the Finals. 14/10 with Wade. Also, fixed you last sentence for you.

[Simple Jack]

Kenneth bringing up Ray Allen as if the lakers didn't have Fisher/Horry draining huge shots for them on the reg + their own referee conspiracy.

[knicksman]

ring as the 1st option =4pts
ring as the 2nd option=2pts
ring as a roleplayer/ringchaser=1 pt

so

1.jordan=24
2. Russell= 22
3. magic =16+2
4. kareem=8+8
5. shaq=12+2
6. Duncan=12+2
7. kobe= 8+6
8. bird=12

9. isiah=8
10. hakeerm=8



LeBron=2

so LeBron needs 12 rings to just equal kobe

With this formula. the losers like wilt are really separated from the winners

[aj1987]

ring as the 1st option =4pts
ring as the 2nd option=2pts
ring as a roleplayer/ringchaser=1 pt

so

1.jordan=24
2. Russell= 22
3. magic =16+2
4. kareem=8+8
5. shaq=12+2
6. Duncan=12+2
7. kobe= 8+6
8. bird=12

9. isiah=8
10. hakeerm=8



LeBron=2

so LeBron needs 12 rings to just equal kobe

With this formula. the losers like wilt are really separated from the winners
You posts and Kenneth's posts are pretty similar. Also, LeBron gets a point each for being a ring chaser, but also gets 8 for being the first option. Therefore, he has 10 points. Also, since each MVP = 2 points, here's the updated list.

1. Russell - 54
2. MJ - 46
3. Kareem - 28
4. Magic - 22
5. Duncan - 18
6. Shaq - 16
7. LeBron - 16
8. Wilt - 16
9. Bird - 16
10. Kobe - 16

[6 for 24]

If I may ask, Kenneth,

What is it you hope to accomplish with threads such as these? Whenever I log on to this wonderful repository of basketball discussion we call "ISH" and I see a post by you, I am very excited because I know you are a true student of the game with much to offer us. However, recently I have been disappointed because it almost feels like you have an agenda here. Far be it for me to critique you, but I don't feel you are accomplishing much as far as swaying the non-believer to your (our) side.

Instead, I suggest you find solace in knowing that, deep in your heart, regardless of what others may think, Kobe is the #1 (or perhaps #2, behind 'Pistol' Pete Maravich (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324732)) chucker of all time, and nothing any of the naysayers can argue will ever change that. Moreover, as I've shown time and time again, this is backed up by both video footage (http://youtu.be/QZbgoC6MiSM) (thanks to the youtube) as well as irrefutable statistical evidence (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324201). So don't waste your time man!

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

[oarabbus]

Rings + MVPs + FMVPs.


Jordan = 17


Russell would have like what, 20+ had they given the award though?

And list 2 is better. Kobe is too high though. He can either barely round out the top 10 or just be outside of it, depending on how much you like kobe. But he isn't top 5 IMO.

[rmt]

ring as the 1st option =4pts
ring as the 2nd option=2pts
ring as a roleplayer/ringchaser=1 pt

so

1.jordan=24
2. Russell= 22
3. magic =16+2
4. kareem=8+8
5. shaq=12+2
6. Duncan=12+2
7. kobe= 8+6
8. bird=12

9. isiah=8
10. hakeerm=8



LeBron=2

so LeBron needs 12 rings to just equal kobe

With this formula. the losers like wilt are really separated from the winners

Duncan was not a 2nd option in any championship year. He should get 16 points with a tie for 4th place with KAJ by your point system.

2007 RS
Duncan 20 pts / 10.6 rebs / 3.4 assts / 2.4 blk 54.6%FG
Parker 18.6 pts / 3.2 rebs / 5.5 assts 52%

2007 Playoffs
Duncan 22.2 pts / 11.5 rebs / 3.3 asst / 3.1 blk 52.1%
Parker 20.8 pts / 3.4 rebs / 5.8 asst 48%

[knicksman]

Duncan was not a 2nd option in any championship year. He should get 16 points with a tie for 4th place with KAJ by your point system.

2007 RS
Duncan 20 pts / 10.6 rebs / 3.4 assts / 2.4 blk 54.6%FG
Parker 18.6 pts / 3.2 rebs / 5.5 assts 52%

2007 Playoffs
Duncan 22.2 pts / 11.5 rebs / 3.3 asst / 3.1 blk 52.1%
Parker 20.8 pts / 3.4 rebs / 5.8 asst 48%

then ill put him above kareem w/c makes him the 4th best player

[IMObjective]

If I may ask, Kenneth,

What is it you hope to accomplish with threads such as these? Whenever I log on to this wonderful repository of basketball discussion we call "ISH" and I see a post by you, I am very excited because I know you are a true student of the game with much to offer us. However, recently I have been disappointed because it almost feels like you have an agenda here. Far be it for me to critique you, but I don't feel you are accomplishing much as far as swaying the non-believer to your (our) side.

Instead, I suggest you find solace in knowing that, deep in your heart, regardless of what others may think, Kobe is the #1 (or perhaps #2, behind 'Pistol' Pete Maravich (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324732)) chucker of all time, and nothing any of the naysayers can argue will ever change that. Moreover, as I've shown time and time again, this is backed up by both video footage (http://youtu.be/QZbgoC6MiSM) (thanks to the youtube) as well as irrefutable statistical evidence (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324201). So don't waste your time man!

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

what?! I'm confused. As Kobe fans we don't want people thinking he's a chucker. Being a chucker is bad. Btw, I also like pistol Pete.

[Olacinco]

Lmao @ d rose #19

[I<3NBA]

the first one is better
any list with the rapist at 5 sucks
/ thread
:lol :lol :lol
:applause:

[BoutPractice]

Alternative for judging a player: the dialectical test, also known as "stan vs hater".

Let's try this test for Tim Duncan. The stan says he's top 3. His argument is that Duncan led 4 teams to the championship: only Russell, Jordan and Mikan led their teams to more championships, but Mikan is suspect because he played pre-shot clock. The hater says that winning is highly contingent on circumstance, and Duncan was helped by Popovich and a great organization. The stan concedes a point, but remarks that the Spurs won only 20 games before Duncan came to the league, and 56 games right after after Duncan was drafted. The hater notes that this is partly due to David Robinson's return. The stan once again concedes a point, but adds that the Spurs retained the best winning percentage as David Robinson declined and after he retired, and that Duncan is the one credible common denominator in the Spurs' success from 1997 to 2014.

The hater says that leading a winning isn't the only argument anyway: what counts is who was considered the best player in the league when they were playing. The stan replies that Duncan has 2 MVPs, including one coinciding with a championship year, and has about a dozen All-NBA First Team appearance. The hater counters that he may have a couple of MVPs, but many players have a more "dominant peak". The stan observes that 2003 Duncan won without any other All-Star, and had dominant all-around performances in the playoffs and Finals, such as a quasi quadruple double in the title clinching game.

The hater moves on to longevity and consistency. Once again, the stan has an answer: Tim Duncan played in 3 different decades, led his team to the best winning percentage in the league through the period, and as an illustration was both a top player in his rookie year, and a last second 3 pointer away from winning another FMVP 16 years later.

The hater then tries the skill argument. The stan points out that Duncan possesses almost every skill there is in basketball, and has as complete a game, on both sides of the court, as any bigman in history.

The hater lists instances where Duncan and his team choked. The stan replies by finding a number of similar examples for every other great player in history.

The hater is left with the eye test: Duncan is boring and "doesn't look as good as (whoever) to me". The stan says that it's the hater's right to think that, but it's a completely subjective opinion on the basis of which no common ground can be found.

etc. etc. until all angles have been probed.

Subject every great player to the test. See whose game and career resists criticism the most. (I suspect that MJ would be at the top of that list)

[ArbitraryWater]

Why not just go off the eye test? Not trolling here, just completely throw all accolades (aside from championships) out the window. Analyze how good players are, if winning as many championships as possible with them as your main piece is the goal. Take into account quality of teammates, role, etc.

:confusedshrug:


Because everyone has different opinions?? People can just say shit favoring their agenda and be like "my eyes saw it"

[SavageMode]

First list is better doe.

[6 for 24]

what?! I'm confused. As Kobe fans we don't want people thinking he's a chucker. Being a chucker is bad. Btw, I also like pistol Pete.

This is where you are mistaken, my friend. Being a chucker is good, what every player should strive for but few have the 'cojones' to accomplish. Chucking leads to made baskets and rebounding opportunities, which lead to wins and build team camraderie. Perhaps it is my cross-sport upbringing (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8426636&postcount=19) that has established this belief, but after watching the NBA for some time now, I am convinced it is correct.

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

[fpliii]

Because everyone has different opinions?? People can just say shit favoring their agenda and be like "my eyes saw it"
Then we can just throw the opinions of those with agendas out the window.